User talk:Franken Kesey/Viveka Spectre (3.5e Prestige Class)
Prerequisites Isn't 19 Wis a bit high? Limits it needlessly to clerics, druids, and ardents in my mind... Perhaps keep it at 15? That seems pretty high for most SAD classes while still having it low enough so that people can enter the class with preperation. What are finite ideas? Wouldn't it easier to just "cannot be lawful"? Why not make it Knowledge (arcane) instead of (the planes) so sorcerers can join as well? And what do you mean "alter matter"? Could you be a little more specific? --Ghostwheel 02:45, February 14, 2010 (UTC) :Your right about the wisdom, lower would be better. But I still think it should be above average. Will 16 and above do? Vroons do very well in this class - noting there Wisdom. :Does lawful entail most religion? (If so I will change it). :The reason that I did not put arcana is, I couldn't think of an ability for the "familiar understanding" skill that would link with it. If you find one, let me know. :I just recently created this class 2 weeks ago on another site. Thus have yet to find all of its loop holes. My meaning of "alter matter", originality, was capability of casting any transmution spell or power. :Thankyou --Franken Kesey 07:40, February 14, 2010 (UTC) :: I think 15 works, since most prerequisites for ability scores are odd--though I don't know why you want to make it a prereq. If people have it high, they'll benefit more from the class, and if not they won't. :: Lawful entails a rigid morale code, from what I understand. It also stops anyone from a monkish persuasion (whether the class or outlook, in general) from taking the class. Is there an actual reason you want people to not be Lawful? :: Spellcraft or Psicraft work, since virtually all primary spellcasters and manifesters have one or the other. :: So say so--"must be able to cast at least one spell from the transmutation school, or one power from the discipline. The less vague the better. --Ghostwheel 07:50, February 14, 2010 (UTC) :::Due to the fact that many of the natural and social rules are broken in this class. I thought it would be better if the character was not lawful - "for all laws can be broken". A crazy character might be able to pull it of - but for most it would be a blunder to be lawful. :::How is the class doing otherwise - balancing, depth, etc... --Franken Kesey 08:04, February 14, 2010 (UTC) Rating and Status Currently is there anything incomplete or not understandable? Is the incomplete template still necessary? --Franken Kesey 16:30, February 14, 2010 (UTC) :For me, the class features are not totally explained (Complete Possession is still blank) and many many of the currently filled in class features are quite subjective and, in some cases, mechanically lacking. Unfinished Business (stating that the character must have some task to perform) is particularly tricky). Roleplaying is good and all, but forcing those tasks onto the character can be frustrating for both the player and his comrades to handle. Also, the flavor seems strange because the fluff states that the nahlasit is a master at controlling matter, but most of its abilities are gears towards possession and separation of mind and body, which seems rather contrary to controlling matter in my opinion. - TG Cid 20:34, February 14, 2010 (UTC) ::Plus, grammar. It's very important. Surgo 21:18, February 14, 2010 (UTC) :::In what way are they lacking (examples)? In reference to "unfinished business", I put a note right above it stating it was a guideline - "not law". In other words you don't have to do any of the examples, and can adopt it to you campaign. I put it there for to create a lucrative range, that's all. I'll try to make it mo better. I had intended on the control of matter literally and that of a physic. But your correct its a bit unbalanced, in the class feature section (altered); but do you think the spells compensate? Thanks --Franken Kesey 22:22, February 14, 2010 (UTC) What's up with the saves?Idkwhatmynameis 22:20, February 14, 2010 (UTC) :I hate over-powered classes (and prestige classes); the low saves are my insurgence. Should I switch providers? Are they over-zealously low? Is it compensated by the high class features and spells? I need more criticism than "whats up". Thanks --Franken Kesey 22:27, February 14, 2010 (UTC) ::I find it odd that you say you hate overpowered classes, and then try to balance something to wizard level. A lot of people here would say that Wizard level stuff is overpowered on its own. Dropping saves is a bizarre place to try to reduce a classes effectiveness though. DCs grow at between 3 points every 4 levels and 1 point every level, while good saves grow at 1 point every other level (except in some rare primary stat synergy cases). If you get the biggest cloak of resistance you can afford and keep boosting it when appropriate, you average a boost of 3 every 4 levels, which only barely keeps up with save DC jumps. I guess what I'm getting at is that nerfing saves is a wierd places to try to reign in a class since they already barely / don't keep up with effect DCs (though the +2s you get at the start or PrCs does help a bit). You're probably better off tweaking active abilities than passive defenses. - TarkisFlux 08:23, February 15, 2010 (UTC) Is it reasonable to delete just "Various parts missing", because all are areas filled? --Franken Kesey 04:21, February 15, 2010 (UTC) Why It's Incomplete Look, you really need to walk into this class with an objective mind emptied of what you know as a creator. Imagine that you are someone who knows nothing about this class, but is interested by the name. So you go to look at it, because maybe you want to play it. If you look at your class from that mind, you'll quickly see why it's incomplete -- because it is not playable. Example: your level 1 ability. This says "Sage Demeanour (Ex): A Nahlásit can replace their dexterity modifier with their wisdom modifier. ". But what does that even mean? Replace dexterity modifier with wisdom modifier for what? And how? Surgo 04:45, February 15, 2010 (UTC) :I realise this class is not understandable, unplayable etc... and have not stated otherwise. Trying to answer and fix any errors that come up. But incomplete, if it were to be defined as fields not being filled (the definition under Dungeons and Dragons Wiki:Content Requirements); I cannot understand. The incomplete template is not what I'm referring to (possibly the reason for this confusion). I'm referring to the line inside that reads: "Various parts missing or not understandable, unplayable as of yet. See talk page for more." Questioning if just the "various parts missing" should be deleted. But the template remain; helping me (and other users) narrow down what the problems are. I was also thinking of adding rhetorical or grammatical issues (or something to that extent) - does that sound reasonable? Also is the "Sage Demeanour" better? Thank you for taking the time to make that clearer. --Franken Kesey 05:52, February 15, 2010 (UTC) ::Due to resent alteration of Dungeons and Dragons Wiki:Content Requirements, the incomplete template will be left unchanged. --Franken Kesey 07:10, February 15, 2010 (UTC) :::(Blegh, edit conflict. I explain that change below, though the change itself could have been inferred from context and other wiki actions (that you may not have been around for) previously. It is not directed at you specifically, apologies if it seemed like that.) :::I wrote that content requirements section to codify the stance that we were taking towards half finished articles, and it looks like I missed a really important part of that thought. We really care about having playable material hosted here and about not hosting non-playable material. That doesn't mean it has to be good material (though we of course prefer that sort), it just has to be complete to the point that you can use it without making up your own mechanics. And because we want people to be able use the site effectively and not get turned off by unusable work, we care more about that even more than we care about it being pretty and formatted correctly (which we care about a lot). So I went and dropped a sentence to that effect in there. Thanks for pointing out that the thought was missing something, even if you weren't intending to. :::Regarding your specific querry, sure, you can go remove that section from the incomplete template if it's bothering you. It doesn't change the fact that lots here is vague to the point of being unusable and mechanically incomplete, but you can remove that section if you want to. The template should stay until you get the class features cleaned up or move it to a user sandbox. :::And here are some other things to look at that I got from a quick glance at the article (haven't looked at it in any depth yet): :::*I have no idea what "Previous Level Advancement" in your table means, how it's restricted, etc. When WotC does this with prestige classes they generally use a different column header and explain it down in the class features. :::*I have no idea how Body Guardian is supposed to work or why it references muscle memory, only that it references a table (whcih is really a list) and has some bizarre "do this within X levels" instead of an actually workable "do this withing X weeks / months / years" requirement. There's vague mention of acquiring them from a willing dying creature, but no discussion of what happens if that creature is ressurected or what type of guardian they turn into from the list below. :::*Body guardian is (ex), but all of the guardians in the list below are (su). How does that even work? :::*Body Guardian 2 happens after you lose the previous one... and doesn't actually appear to be an ability at all. :::*I only know you get Groks at all because I scrolled down the page until I saw them. I have no idea how they work, and only assume you get them at level 1 instead of 12 because you put a level 1 through 12 progression in the table. They need to be spelled out more clearly, added to the ability table, and moved up with the rest of the level 1 abilities. :::- TarkisFlux 07:30, February 15, 2010 (UTC) ::::Thank you for clarifying anyway, here are my responses. ::::*I replaced "Spellcasting" with "Previous Level Advancement", so that a non-spellcasting class could still level with this prestige class. ::::*I had forgotten the list for a while, and was going down a different road (when using it). Has been promptly deleted (with its references). The guardian uses your body, and cannot be resurrected. ::::*I'll work on "guardian 2". It would suck if your prone all the time, so continuing with the guardian option was my solution. Do you have any solutions for the prone delima? ::::*fixed groks to have the spell template. Were is the ability table? ::::- Thanks --Franken Kesey 08:21, February 15, 2010 (UTC) :::::More later, since it's late for me, but I still don't know what Previous Level Advancement does since you still haven't said what it advances. It sorta looks like it advances everything, and that's bad. Spellcasting advancement doesn't advance any other class features, would this advance them? Would a wizard get bonus feats on top of spellcaster advancement? Would a druid boost their wild shape as well as their spellcastings and whatnot? Would a rogue gain all of their sneak attack, trap sense, evasion, uncanny dodge, whatever abilities? If that's what you intend with it, then there is no reason for anyone to not take this PrC ever if they can afford a 2-3 level "dip". One of those levels needs to go to getting a 1st level trans spell, and the other levels go towards this class when you don't advance your base class at the same time. Which is a really bizarre thing to do with a PrC. You lose almost nothing and gain a ridiculous amount of stuff for that bargain price. You're not supposed to get all of it, with every other PrC you're supposed to get what it gives you instead of what you could have gotten with your base class. There's no tradeoff here with that formulation of the ability. - TarkisFlux 08:37, February 15, 2010 (UTC)